Author
Topic: Randomize Seating - Beta 4 (Read 1305 times)

First issue from playing around (getting ready for tournament later tonight):

I have some players locked in seat as dealers, in addition to myself in a seat where it's easiest to run the tournament, but when I click on "Randomize Seating", and in leaving the box unchecked to include those locked in their seats, it still includes those locked in to their seat. Doesn't effect me personally since I don't randomize, but, since I did stumble upon it, wanted to let you know.

Logged

My cowboys shot down your rockets---If you send a request to me please send that you got me from here w/your TD name to confirm. Thanks!

Weird, I don't see that. I pressed the "Randomize Seating" button on the Tables tab, and then pressed the "OK" button on the "Randomize Seating" dialog (leaving "Include players locked in their seat" unchecked).

The software kind of cheats in that it simply unseats everyone (except locked players, in this case) and then runs the table balancing code. So, when you press the "OK" button to randomize the seating, the "Unbalanced Tables" dialog should open with the suggested seating moves. What you should see underneath that dialog, on the Tables tab, is everyone moved into the "Unseated Players" section, except for the locked players, which should remain in their current seats. What are you seeing?

Ok... Here's what I'm seeing. I have 4 tables. When I have enough players to properly use all 4 tables, it works without a hitch, leaving me seated. However, with only two people in at the moment I tested it out, we were both seated at the same table. Attached are 4 images so you can see where it's not quite properly working (in my opinion). It technically is working right, in that it does randomly seat the players, but doesn't leave the locked player in their seat.

Looks like that's the "cheat" part kicking in. Since you've got unavailable seats on tables 1 and 2, which effectively makes those tables have 9 seats instead of 10, and the algorithm tends to move players to the largest table, it seats players at table 3, the first of the two larger tables.

Note that this is only because one of the players becomes unseated as part of the randomization process. Otherwise, it wouldn't have moved anyone from table 2 to table 3, since the tables are technically already in balance. It's only because a player is not seated. The algorithm needs to seat the player somewhere, and it chooses table 3 as the best choice. At that point, it needs to move one of the players, either from table 3 to table 2 or vice versa. It seems logical that it should move the non-locked player, but I believe it's probably deciding that moving to the "better" table (larger, and since all players will be on one table, it is, for the purpose of table consolidation at that moment, considered the final table) is more important than honoring player seating locks.

Honestly, this is just an educated guess, because I didn't really go in and examine the balancing algorithm again to see why it is doing this. It's a pretty peculiar scenario, and one that I don't think merits tweaking the algorithm (not that you were suggesting that).

I figured it was an odd occurance, but as I may have,and meant to note before, I don't personally use the the randomize seating button, as I have it auto-seat as I buy in players, which works well enough... Just need to get a certain sound file for when players complain of not being at a particular table

Logged

My cowboys shot down your rockets---If you send a request to me please send that you got me from here w/your TD name to confirm. Thanks!